Therefore, when a prosecutor objects on the grounds that “the officer isn’t required to know that,” they are actually admitting that their witness is legally and factually incompetent to testify to those facts because they lack personal knowledge, and would be both committing perjury and violating the admissibility and hearsay rules by answering.
There is the PatriNUT way, and then there is the way that wins…. beating the shit out of them with their own rule book.
Okay, here is yet another fine example of people that THINK they know what the hell they are talking about and what is actually going on. Since this is from a California fake court setting for a traffic INFRACTION, I am not surprised at all by the comments, as the majority of folks there are…
Okay, for those of you that live in a Republic where ‘traffic’ citations are issued as “civil infractions,” here are a couple of suggestions on what to file and why. When you are STOPPED and DETAINED by an officer for a civil infraction the legal facts are that the officer has perpetrated an illegal and…